If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Comment

Comment

so i was reading this artical today about a two mile long ice plug that was drilled out of dome C in antarctica. this was done to see the amounts of methane and carbon monoxide as far back as they could get in time. the previous ice plug that was taken in russia was 450,000 years old and the oldest to date. this one was 650,000 years old. it revealed that carbon monoxide is 27% higher and methane levels are 112% higher then 650,000 years ago. they also said that these are the highest levels seen probably in over millions of years. i guess you could say that this is real eh?

Comment

Poaching in Antarctic waters
Posted by Raven on 04 January 2006
from the dept.
The Australian Patrol ship ?Ocean Vikings? have detected several ships that are fishing unregulated under various names and flags in protected waters, thus threatening the already fragile ecosystem. Link: BYM News

Comment / Post Update

Comment

Hello koldK! I'm new and would like to thank you for sharing the article. I'm from San Francisco. The West Coast coastal birds and marine life certainly had a bad year, hopefully, it will be better this year.

Comment

so i was reading this artical today about a two mile long ice plug that was drilled out of dome C in antarctica. this was done to see the amounts of methane and carbon monoxide as far back as they could get in time. the previous ice plug that was taken in russia was 450,000 years old and the oldest to date. this one was 650,000 years old. it revealed that carbon monoxide is 27% higher and methane levels are 112% higher then 650,000 years ago. they also said that these are the highest levels seen probably in over millions of years. i guess you could say that this is real eh?

Would you please tell me where dome C is in the Antarctica? Also, what type of machinery is used and how it removes a two mile long ice plug. I would like to know more about carbon monoxide and methane it seems they are not at all good for the environment. Take it easy on me I'm new to all this I do find it interesting and would like very much to understand as much as I can with some help. Thank you.

Comment

Poaching in Antarctic waters
Posted by Raven on 04 January 2006
from the dept.
The Australian Patrol ship ?Ocean Vikings? have detected several ships that are fishing unregulated under various names and flags in protected waters, thus threatening the already fragile ecosystem. Link: BYM News

Comment / Post Update

What happens to these ships that are fishing unregulated are they fined, licenses revoked?

Comment

We came accross an unregulated lingliner in Antartica, we confiscated the line and the ship came over to us and asked us what we were doing and we found that the ship was infact an unlicensed fishing boat. The sad thing again is that there is no one out there inforcing these rules. Although N.Z. and Aus has a reward for information leading to the capture of these vessels there is still no way of arresting them and making them pay!! Global Warming "EAT THE EARTH" and just wait and see how long it takes us to reach 100% entropy!

Comment

Naw, all of this global warming crap is just that, crap. Anybody with half a brain knows that the global warming scare is just another junk science-based hoax that the libs are using to try to win more elections and push through reforms that will drag the economy while lining their pockets. We've heard all of these types of scares before.

That sounded pretty good huh? I've been practicing my "I'm a 'conservative' and you are an idiot" speaches. But really, I'm considering publishing an article that analyzes and profiles an effective FUD propoganda campagne. I was thinking about using this Steven Milloy article http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=894 as an example and then analyze the techniques used piece by piece. All in all, I think it's an incredible example of FUD propoganda by somebody who, despite a long and highly successful career, is at the top of his game.

This article takes the average mean temperature readings from the Antartica and creates an image that makes it look like the tempurature is actually going down. Scores of people without a scientific background buy this type of thing (lots of money goes into this type of "research").

If you look at the graph, you will see two trend lines which are unlabled. Although he has some emotionally appealing, if inaccurate, messages in some boxes with a formula describing the trend lines, the trend lines themselves are improperly used. If statistical chart, for a single set of data, includes a trend line, it includes A (as in singular) trend line. You cannot have MORE THAN ONE trend with a single set of data!! Thus, this chart is first a demonstration of the poor use of statistics tools. What these trend lines actually represent is the data between the years 1949 to 1974 (the red line) and then from 1975 to 2004 (the blue line), but the lines extend past their respective data sets!

The red trend line (49 to 74) was a very sharp rise and so that line is relatively short, suggestive of a hot tempered person who is unreasonable, bug short-lived. The blue trend line (75 to 2003) is very long and stable looking, suggesting a calm head and stability over a period of a centry.

But the blue line only represents data for the last 30 years of the chart. Futhermore, he can encapsulate the warming period from 49 to 74 and say that warming occured then when there was a "global cooling scare." When I read that, my first thought was, WTF!? I've never heard of a global cooling scare. But this is a nice tool to sugest that there are panicing idiots out there and they tend to panic about the opposite of what is happening. So now that the region has experienced a very slight cooling over the last 30 years, these idiots are panicing about global warming -- very clever.

So if you take the same data set and you calculate a REAL trend, it's y=0.0186x - 1.364, or a rise of 0.0186 degrees Celscius every year, but starting -1.364 degrees below the baseline (which is the average tempurature between 1951 and 1980 for the region being examined). Obviously, global warming started before the baseline period, but that is what scientists are using for this measure.

Also note that these aren't global values. The average change looks more like this (this trend line since 1903 is only y=0.0071x - 0.3215, less steep than the change in the Antarctic, the poles are known to be more sensitive)